In this blog, CReAM Researchers and CReAM Fellows comment on recent events and on the current political debate. Below each article you can add comments.

Monday, 20 April 2015

Manifesto Check: Lib Dems take a more liberal approach to immigration

by Ian Preston

Centre for Research and Analysis of Migration (CReAM) at
University College London.

When asked about immigration in the recent leaders' debate,
Nick Clegg sought to draw a distinction between “good” and “bad” immigration. The Liberal Democrat manifesto does not try
to push this distinction. Immigration is presented as primarily a good thing.
The party believes in Britain as an “open, trading nation”, “within the
European Union and beyond” and celebrates openness to “visitors who boost our
economy”, “migrant workers who play a vital role in business and public
services” and “refugees fleeing persecution”.

Although the Liberal Democrats were part of a coalition that
has tightened immigration policy in several ways, in its manifesto, the party positions itself to push for a relatively
liberal approach to future decision making.

A liberal approach

The post-study work visa – which allowed graduates of UK
universities to stay and work for up to two years – was removed by the
coalition government. Some commentators have calledfor
its restoration. Although the party does not propose to fully reopen the route,
its manifesto does contain a proposal to reintroduce a post-study work visa specifically for STEM (science,
technology, engineering and mathematics) graduates, if work is found within six
months of their degree.

Popular opinion tends to be relatively welcoming to students as immigrants. And there is evidence from the US that foreign-born STEM students in particular may
contribute significantly to innovation, productivity growth and wages in the
country they migrate to.

High-skilled immigration from outside the European Union is currently capped. The party commits itself to “continue to allow high-skilled
immigration to support key sectors,” but there is no specific word on what will
happen to the cap.

The English language skills of immigrants are mentioned as
pertinent to employment prospects, and to schools. Language assessments are
proposed for new claimants of the Jobseekers Allowance. English lessons are to
be encouraged for parents, where schools have high proportions of pupils with
English as a second language.

Better treatment for asylum seekers

Several reforms to the treatment of asylum seekers are
announced. Indefinite detention is to be ended. The manifesto also promises to
abandon the Azure card scheme, which restricts where and how refused asylum seekers
can spend their weekly allowance, and effectively requires them to identify
themselves as such when they do.

There are also changes to asylum seekers' rights to work.
Typically, asylum seekers are not allowed to work, unless their case has lasted over a year through no
fault of their own. The justification for the current policy is supposedly “to
protect local labour markets”. But this seems weak, given that there is no more
reason to think refugee migration should be harmful to local employment or wages than economic migration. The manifesto promises, not only
to allow asylum seekers to work after six months, but to require work to be
sought as a condition of benefit receipt. In light of the evidence, this seems
sensible.

Not a problem

Rather than characterising immigration itself as a problem,
the manifesto pledges to “tackle weaknesses” in the immigration system, which
threaten to “undermine confidence” in it. The party proposes inspections,
efficiency improvements and reviews aimed at restoring faith in the system.

In the manifesto, there is no discussion – let alone
endorsement – of such concerns, but there is a proposal for annual assessment
of skill and labour market shortfalls and surpluses, impact on the economy,
public services and communities. Such assessments are already regularly carried out by the Migration Advisory Committee. The manifesto proposes to make them annual, and
to put them at the centre of a presentation to parliament.

There are also promises to ensure tougher policing of abuses
of the system in both education and work.
But these are not at all specific in the case of educational institutions, and
simply described as a doubling of inspections to check for compliance with
employment law in the case of employers.

Further proposed changes to the system appear to be mainly administrative.
The party pledges to ensure fast processing of work, tourist and family visas
and of asylum claims, but does not provide any details about how they are to be
achieved, and at what cost.